Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] ...saving plugin state
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Jan 12 2001 - 20:41:07 EET
That might be better, but it would break binary compatibility, and it's
slightly less S.
Alternativly, the human readable (and multilingual) names could be in
the XML GUI description (nothing stops text hosts from reading it too)
and plugin developers can use machine friendly names in the labels.
- Steve
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 01:15:53PM -0500, Richard C. Burnett wrote:
> So for that sense what would be nice is a port name and a port label. I
> am not sure if this type of stuff is defined already, its been about a
> month since I looked at the LADSPA stuff. So the name is used for 'state'
> specific information whereas the label i just for the GUI. This would
> really make sense for multilingual situations where the plugin could be
> initialized with some sort of language setting, and the labels are
> generated internally based on that setting. Then, the port names remain
> the same since they are for saving and stuff. The downfall of this
> however is that if you make the port names too cryptic, then modifying a
> 'saved state' file won't be so descriptive.
>
> Rick
>
>
>
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
>
> > You could well be right. I'm not happy about defining the port by its
> > label though: "Modulation depth (0=none, 1=AM, 2=RM)" doesn't seem like a
> > very nice id. Plus nothing guarantees that the label is unique (I think).
> >
> > Maybe I sould use less verbose labels ;) but in the absense of a GUI
> > they add to usability.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jan 12 2001 - 21:15:26 EET